Comments on: Stay at home, Senator, and raise your children

By: scarlett

scarlett — Sat, 04 Jul 2009 09:46:53 +0000

The vitriolic comments against children is due to the overwhelming number of them forced on us in every possible way in current society- there is no longer any escape from badly behaved spoilt brats and their indulgent one eyed parents. How is it that our parents could easily love children and teach good behaviour in public at any age and this generation of parents are so inept at it- that is why children are now so activley disliked.

By: Rachel Kronberger

Rachel Kronberger — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:41:11 +0000

Like child-bearing, the window of opportunity to take up parliamentary responsibilities can be limited. Sometimes they will coincide. This is surely hard for everybody.

By: anne edwards

anne edwards — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 03:46:40 +0000

poor helen, how is it possible to spend 20 years being a try hard??

By: Jim Reiher

Jim Reiher — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:36:44 +0000

Other parliamentarians have been allowed to keep their children with them in the past. This is a storm in a tea cup. Of course she should have been allowed to keep her child with her. And those who are so hostile to that, I feel certain, are more hostile to the fact that is was a Greens senator. If it has been a Liberal, I wonder who would be saying what?

The only political stunt we saw yesterday was Barnaby Joyce getting a cheap shot at the Greens over the incident. Since then anyone who likes to criticise the Greens is also having a go. But face facts: you would not be bothering to write if it was someone from your favourite party. Or worse: you would be saying the complete opposite!

By: coreena

coreena — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 06:59:46 +0000

Go Helen Go. Hanson-Young should know the rules about strangers on the floor & if she doesn’t like the rules get another job. Giving birth doesn’t give a woman the right to expect her workplace to change to suit her. Checkout chicks, women in the military, and the majority of jobs don’t have the privilege of having their kids in the workplace. Why does Hanson-Young think she should be above the law when it’s her job to uphold it?

By: Juliette Hughes Norwood

Juliette Hughes Norwood — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 14:17:24 +0000

The venom against mothers and children here is interesting … I don’t think we have a hope of equality in the workplace if mothers are expected to be either nanny-users or hausfraus. Why the hell shouldn’t she have her child with her? Why the hell isn’t there a creche in Parliament? Why the hell are mothers so discriminated against?
The Senator has a contribution to make. She happens to have a small child and happens to bring her into her workplace. Stop worrying about it. All this bile against women with children says a lot about the poverty of our expectations.

By: Kevin Mulcahy

Kevin Mulcahy — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:29:02 +0000

This is also the first time I have questioned my subscription to Crikey - not for Helen’s comments but for the replies. You’re not in the real world people! we have obviously bred a generation of public servants and victim conscience that really do believe the people we pay to make decisions on our nation and future can work outside the domain of the rest of the real world. This is the first blog have read today that actually has people thinking what she did was right.

By: Juliette Hughes Norwood

Juliette Hughes Norwood — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 09:22:33 +0000

“It”; “the thing”. Hmm.
Either this is a clumsy attempt at Swiftean satire as in “A Modest Proposal” or it’s just plain nasty.
Trouble is, I can’t tell which. My problem or Ms Razer’s? Not sure.
In the meantime, let kids come into their parents’ workplaces, for democracy’s sake.

By: James Bennett

James Bennett — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 08:43:38 +0000

I’m not sure of Razor’s point but you’ve got to laugh at the responses.

Isn’t it Crikey’s brief to take the piss out of lazy,dopey politicians.

Poor Sarah said she had never been so humiliated ? All the speaker did was to politely ask her to remove her whining child from a situation the child obviously did not want to be in.

And you silly buggers want to defend her? Even the mother loving Pru Goward thinks she was a goose not to make alternative arrangements.

Toughen up you fools.

By: quinch

quinch — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 07:35:38 +0000

Is Helen being acerbic or sarcastic? I don’t care - more of this sort of commentary would make the drivel out there palatable.

More Razer please!

By: meski

meski — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 07:15:35 +0000

Won’t someone please think of the children! Imagine the bad habits they could pick up from being exposed to the Senate. :^)

By: stephen henry

stephen henry — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 07:11:00 +0000

Well Paul I don’t think she’s just “trying to be funny”. I think she believes what she wrote. More concerning is she represents the tip of the iceberg when it comes to narrow minded reaction from across the media and community

By: Tom McLoughlin

Tom McLoughlin — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 07:09:19 +0000

“the thing”.

Now that’s what I call projection.

By: Paul Sofronoff

Paul Sofronoff — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 07:01:57 +0000

Look it’s really simple.

This is not a debate of the issue.

Ms Razor is trying to be funny.

She isn’t.

Never has been.

Probably, never will be.

By: stephen henry

stephen henry — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:56:54 +0000

Regardless of if it’s satire or not, it’s not funny. I think the senator has performed well since her election. She is intelligent and considered which is more than I can say about this article by the aforementioned contributor.
I haven’t heard anyone suggesting the Senate should become a kindergarten, and it is ugly that the presence of a child (ever so briefly) causes such a furore and outpouring of bile.
Many things that happen in the Senate are unacceptable and outrageous, a mother holding her 2 yr olds hand in exceptional circumstances is not one of them!
Construction sites are not suitable for children even breifly, because of the physical danger.

By: Leonie Davies

Leonie Davies — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:45:54 +0000

Who are you “Helen Razer”? The child was apparently not crying until wrenched from her mother. Her mother does not appear to be her ” primary care giver “as the little girl was leaving to go back to Adelaide with her - perhaps she is her joint carer - what business is it of yours anyway!

How dare you speak about someone’s child and what their name might/mightnot be in such an arrogant manner. It seems your vitriole is misinformed and probably reflects on personal issues you may have with parenting in your own life - as the level of emotion displayed by you is quite fundamentalist!

By: meski

meski — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:35:02 +0000

I tend to agree, Anna, that as satire, it wasn’t terribly funny. Perhaps Helen’s looking for a job scriptwriting for The Chaser?

By: John Donovan

John Donovan — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:34:54 +0000

Based on Anna’s well worded contribution, I would like to withdraw the word “shit”, and substitute it with “extremely silly”.

But I would like to point out that Ms Razor used the word “fucking”, which is a little strong. Even for supposed satire.

By: Anna Gifford

Anna Gifford — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:26:16 +0000

Meski, I think the problem is that it isn’t satire, it’s just poor writing. Some of the comments in this and the other Crikey page on this issue for and against having children in Parliament make far better work in addressing what the core questions are, namely should children be allowed in a workplace, if so are there particular workplaces where they definitely shouldn’t (e.g. construction sites), when common sense should prevail, if a working day is 17 hours long does that give provide cause to bend the rules, can a person do a job if their family life is present, etc. etc. Helen Razor’s article is just an anti-feminist tirade. I think most of us, if given the job of arguing the ‘con’ case, could embed some valid counter-arguments in our witty diatribe, rather than resorting to ‘greens are hippies’, ‘mothers are exhausted and unable to do any other job well’ and using a scatalogical metaphor as a ‘smart’ closer.

By: Damo

Damo — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:06:56 +0000

And this satire added what to the debate?

By: meski

meski — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 06:03:23 +0000

I think it was intended to be satire. It seems, that like Ben Pobjie over at New Matilda, that you need to spell this out in 15 point bold.

By: John Donovan

John Donovan — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 05:33:53 +0000

Andrew Thomas
Posted Friday, 19 June 2009 at 3:06 pm | Permalink
Helen please keep up the good work, your article brightened up my day.
The rest of you should get a life.

Andrew - are you implying that because the majority of the people posting here have an opinion that contracticts your own, that they are dead? And they should get a life? I have never understood that stupid phrase - it smacks of someone who has used up all of their own opinions so they trot out a well worn, meaningless, and foolish phrase.

By: Dee

Dee — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 05:31:57 +0000

Oh Helen, what a load of garbage. Your rant didn’t even make interesting or challenging reading. As with some of your ramblings in the Oz a few years back, I had to re-read some pars of your Crikey piece to figure out where the hell you were taking us.

I agree with the earlier reader who says that, yes, Crikey is a broad church for opinion and witty debate. However, generally the pieces are of a much higher quality than the bilge you just served up.

By: Heathdon McGregor

Heathdon McGregor — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 05:26:23 +0000

I have liked Helen’s sense of humour since I was a J baby. Still never sure if the tongue is in the cheek or not.

Is the senator like those people who move near pubs and complain of the noise? Yes the parliament is a workplace that is not child friendly, neither is a construction site. Is it discriminatory for other non tradionally child friendly work places to ban kids?

Construction sites, churches,(as marriage permits) cinemas, libraries. Freedom for the rude to impose their choices on everybody else at the expense of everybody else. Hooray

By: John Donovan

John Donovan — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 05:19:00 +0000

Jesus Razor, that’s got to be the stupidest shit you have ever posted. Generally love your work, but today you had your idiot hat on.